Atkins Diet Revisited
Replies
-
I was just about to say this Parks. People who have little knowledge of Atkins love to talk about how unsustainable and restrictive a diet it is. Little do they know that the last phase does have bread, fruits, etc.lemurcat12 wrote: »It gets a bad rap because there's no need to stick to 30 grams of carbs or below or whatever it is to lose weight, or to give up fruit and potatoes and ice cream, if you happen to like those foods. But if someone prefers eating that way, I wouldn't criticize. I think it's a fine eating plan for some people, just not me.
Beyond that, I think it's historically gotten a bad rap from some health-oriented types or "experts" because of the idea that it promotes eating lots of red meat and cheese and bacon, etc., which they see as bad for you. So it gets criticized for being about losing weight in an unhealthy way. Personally, I think low fat is a worse diet (if I had to pick one I'd do low carb over low fat, but luckily I don't have to do either) and the problems with saturated fat and red meat are oversold, so I'm not making that criticism, just reporting it.
It always surprises me how many people's knowledge of the Atkins diet starts and ends at the induction phase. Doing nothing but the induction phase is essentially a standard ketogenic diet. The Atkins diet slowly reintroduces carbohydrates into your diet over time and the macros for many people end up looking more like a paleo diet without the arbitrary food restrictions like dairy and legumes.
I didn't actually say it was unsustainable and restrictive. I said it was fine for some, but not for me. It's an answer to OP's question. And sure, it's true I group Atkins and keto together in my mind, but the point remains, as for me I see no benefit to the induction phase, etc., or lowering my carbs. For others the macros even of keto may be ideal.
It would be nice if people would address what was actually said.
0 -
Its EASY to tell from these comments who actually READ the book/followed the plan.For the 100TH TIME- Atkins is NOT low carb FOREVER!!! You must go through the PHASES..phases ONE is 20 carbs or less for TWO WEEKS...those carbs should come from VEGETABLES...there are MORE phases and carbs(even BREAD and FRUIT(gasp) are reintroduced slowly while you monitor what your body accepts and your weight loss progress...you can't eat 20 carbs or less,lose weight,start eating 300 grams next week,then say that ATKINS failed NO!!! YOU FAILED to READ the book and follow the plan correctly.
-
0 -
AlanaTedmon wrote: »I definitely can see how some people would see it as being tricky to navigate social settings on this diet. I think I've been kind of lucky in that many dinner parties I've been to provide cheese and veggie platters but that's definitely not the case all the time.
It can take a little more social skill, but not a whole lot. I've rarely had anyone press the issue. Eating out, I almost never have a problem. If anything, the biggest problem would sometimes be that I am not at all interested in eating because I am not hungry. I hate buying food that I didn't want to eat. Usually, I will just ask for some coffee and drink it and talk. Maybe I'll get a chicken wing app (making sure to ask if they're floured or breaded) and eat a couple then take the rest to go.
The places you go that truly have nothing you can eat are very rare. I tend to be extra restrictive (way more than Atkins requires) and I still have no problems.AlanaTedmon wrote: »It really does have a very long list of restrictions but do the foods really make you smell after a period of time?? I've never heard of that!
I think they're referencing the keto-breath and keto-pee smells. I also had a period where my normal body odor was a bit "off". It wasn't bad. It was just different than how I normally smelled. All three of those have gone away on their own. Any smell differences are almost certainly temporary. It's definitely not something that only comes later (it was right at the start actually) and they never leaves.0 -
Its EASY to tell from these comments who actually READ the book/followed the plan.For the 100TH TIME- Atkins is NOT low carb FOREVER!!! You must go through the PHASES..phases ONE is 20 carbs or less for TWO WEEKS...those carbs should come from VEGETABLES...there are MORE phases and carbs(even BREAD and FRUIT(gasp) are reintroduced slowly while you monitor what your body accepts and your weight loss progress...you can't eat 20 carbs or less,lose weight,start eating 300 grams next week,then say that ATKINS failed NO!!! YOU FAILED to READ the book and follow the plan correctly.
-
YES! all of this^^^^^^
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
AlanaTedmon wrote: »
Like any other "diet", if you eat too much you will not lose weight...0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I was just about to say this Parks. People who have little knowledge of Atkins love to talk about how unsustainable and restrictive a diet it is. Little do they know that the last phase does have bread, fruits, etc.lemurcat12 wrote: »It gets a bad rap because there's no need to stick to 30 grams of carbs or below or whatever it is to lose weight, or to give up fruit and potatoes and ice cream, if you happen to like those foods. But if someone prefers eating that way, I wouldn't criticize. I think it's a fine eating plan for some people, just not me.
Beyond that, I think it's historically gotten a bad rap from some health-oriented types or "experts" because of the idea that it promotes eating lots of red meat and cheese and bacon, etc., which they see as bad for you. So it gets criticized for being about losing weight in an unhealthy way. Personally, I think low fat is a worse diet (if I had to pick one I'd do low carb over low fat, but luckily I don't have to do either) and the problems with saturated fat and red meat are oversold, so I'm not making that criticism, just reporting it.
It always surprises me how many people's knowledge of the Atkins diet starts and ends at the induction phase. Doing nothing but the induction phase is essentially a standard ketogenic diet. The Atkins diet slowly reintroduces carbohydrates into your diet over time and the macros for many people end up looking more like a paleo diet without the arbitrary food restrictions like dairy and legumes.
I didn't actually say it was unsustainable and restrictive. I said it was fine for some, but not for me. It's an answer to OP's question. And sure, it's true I group Atkins and keto together in my mind, but the point remains, as for me I see no benefit to the induction phase, etc., or lowering my carbs. For others the macros even of keto may be ideal.
It would be nice if people would address what was actually said.
I didn't say you did?
I was quoting Parks who was quoting you. He was basically confirming what you had said...that in general people think of Atkins only in the induction phase and don't think of Atkins beyond that. The induction phase being compromised of things like bacon, meat, cheese, etc.0 -
A strict Atkins diet keeps you in the fat-burning mode all the time. A lot of people do not realize that the ONLY way to lose weight is to be in the fat-burning mode while running a calorie deficit. Knowing how to get into the fat-burning mode- there are several ways- means that people can tailor their weight-loss approach to suit their needs.
I will repost a longer explanation I did yesterday on another thread- if I can find it with this new system.
No, I think we're good.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I was just about to say this Parks. People who have little knowledge of Atkins love to talk about how unsustainable and restrictive a diet it is. Little do they know that the last phase does have bread, fruits, etc.lemurcat12 wrote: »It gets a bad rap because there's no need to stick to 30 grams of carbs or below or whatever it is to lose weight, or to give up fruit and potatoes and ice cream, if you happen to like those foods. But if someone prefers eating that way, I wouldn't criticize. I think it's a fine eating plan for some people, just not me.
Beyond that, I think it's historically gotten a bad rap from some health-oriented types or "experts" because of the idea that it promotes eating lots of red meat and cheese and bacon, etc., which they see as bad for you. So it gets criticized for being about losing weight in an unhealthy way. Personally, I think low fat is a worse diet (if I had to pick one I'd do low carb over low fat, but luckily I don't have to do either) and the problems with saturated fat and red meat are oversold, so I'm not making that criticism, just reporting it.
It always surprises me how many people's knowledge of the Atkins diet starts and ends at the induction phase. Doing nothing but the induction phase is essentially a standard ketogenic diet. The Atkins diet slowly reintroduces carbohydrates into your diet over time and the macros for many people end up looking more like a paleo diet without the arbitrary food restrictions like dairy and legumes.
I didn't actually say it was unsustainable and restrictive. I said it was fine for some, but not for me. It's an answer to OP's question. And sure, it's true I group Atkins and keto together in my mind, but the point remains, as for me I see no benefit to the induction phase, etc., or lowering my carbs. For others the macros even of keto may be ideal.
It would be nice if people would address what was actually said.
I read what was said. I was more responding to comments like:It gets a bad rap because there's no need to stick to 30 grams of carbs or below or whatever it is to lose weight, or to give up fruit and potatoes and ice cream, if you happen to like those foods. But if someone prefers eating that way, I wouldn't criticize. I think it's a fine eating plan for some people, just not me.
What you're describing isn't Atkins, and that you equate Atkins and keto as the same thing in your mind is m point. They aren't. That's a common misconception because all some people know about is Atkins induction, but that's not the actual plan if you read the book or even looked into it whatsoever. What you're describing is a ketogenic diet. Atkins is a diet that adjusts your macros over time based on your goals. They simply are not the same, beyond the optional induction phase of Atkins resembling a ketogenic diet for 2 weeks.
I would agree with people saying these diets probably aren't the best fit for many, maybe even most people. It's just the misinformation equating Atkins to a standard ketogenic diet, saying you will stink because someone knew someone on Atkins that stank (lol?), and the like that rubs me the wrong way (an acknowledged pet peeve of mine).0 -
A strict Atkins diet keeps you in the fat-burning mode all the time. A lot of people do not realize that the ONLY way to lose weight is to be in the fat-burning mode while running a calorie deficit. Knowing how to get into the fat-burning mode- there are several ways- means that people can tailor their weight-loss approach to suit their needs.
If you are in a state of negative energy balance (calorie deficit) you are burning fat and do not have to stress over getting into a "fat burning mode"...
0 -
I didn't say I have all the answers, but I don't get why you need to stroke your ego all the time? Which I'd be careful about because you are wrong on at least a couple of points above.0
-
I don't think you read the post previous.
You can be in a negative calorie balance and still not burn fat- it depends on your glycogen stores. When you burn through your glycogen stores to a certain degree- about 50-70%- then you start to burn fat.
You HAVE to be in the fat-burning mode to burn fat- pure and simple.
Now, the heart is ALWAYS in the fat-burning mode, but on the aggregate the amount of fat burned is offset by the ingestion of carbohydrates and fats.
You burn through glycogen stores when you are performing glycogen demanding activity. The body switches to fat stores at rest and during low intensity activity. So if you are indeed in a state of negative energy balance you are indeed burning fat... even with fully stocked glycogen.
0 -
Seriously? From someone who is using a profile picture of someone that isn't them trying to come off as an expert on MFP? Yeah, no.
0 -
[quote=I'm curious to get solid first-hand information from people who've had experience with this particular diet. [/quote]
I tried the Atkins diet a number of years ago, stuck with it for about five months and yes, at first, I found it worked very well for me. I lost a fair bit of weight initially (about 20lbs) and I just loved being able to eat lots of cheese (a favourite of mine, and definitely missed now!) and nuts (another favourite) and ... and ... and ... but I really missed bread and fruit, and carbs in general.
Oh - and bacon & eggs for breakfast every day? A dream. Until I soooo missed the bread that's a mandatory part of a fried breakfast, in my humble opinion!
But, in the end, two things:
1. The weight stopped coming off, first so fast and then not at all and (more important to me!) --
2. I got so very (sorry, no nice way to say this!) constipated and just couldn't bear that any more.
So I stopped. Reverted to "normal" eating patterns and put back that 20lbs and probably another 10 or 15 on top.
It wasn't until I "found" My Fitness Pal (or it found me??!), and the benefits of proper portion control and exercise (even though I knew it to be sound and sensible advice!) that I have managed to take all that and more off, and it's literally changed both my life and my lifeSTYLE
. A switch was flicked. And, even though (dammit!) I've put back a few pounds on holiday, I've seriously altered the way I eat and, more importantly, live.
But you say in your original or early post(s) that your parents have been on it for years and it works for them ... it's perfectly true & acceptable that what works for one person will not work for another. So, despite me being a real failure at Atkins, I really hope it works for you. Good luck with it all
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I read what was said. I was more responding to comments like:lemurcat12 wrote: »It gets a bad rap because there's no need to stick to 30 grams of carbs or below or whatever it is to lose weight, or to give up fruit and potatoes and ice cream, if you happen to like those foods. But if someone prefers eating that way, I wouldn't criticize. I think it's a fine eating plan for some people, just not me.What you're describing isn't Atkins, and that you equate Atkins and keto as the same thing in your mind is m point. They aren't. That's a common misconception because all some people know about is Atkins induction, but that's not the actual plan if you read the book or even looked into it whatsoever. What you're describing is a ketogenic diet. Atkins is a diet that adjusts your macros over time based on your goals. They simply are not the same, beyond the optional induction phase of Atkins resembling a ketogenic diet for 2 weeks.
That's, I guess, interesting, or would be to someone considering doing Atkins, but my response was actually more relevant to OP's question. The idea that you are supposed to cut carbs low enough to go into ketosis (even if just for a period of time) IS why many people are negative about Atkins--although I don't think I'm really negative, just not interested personally--just as the idea that people eat lots of high fat foods that are traditionally considered unhealthy.
Also, OP's intro post focused on the same aspects of Atkins as my response did. My impression is that keto and low carb and Atkins get used pretty interchangeably on these boards and I'm not all that concerned with the differences between them and I guess I read the OP as more about low carb (or keto, like I said) in general than Atkins which, yes, is more involved than I realized. Perhaps if one is into low carb diets or the specific virtues of one vs. another the differences would seem more important, but that didn't seem to be the focus of the question.I would agree with people saying these diets probably aren't the best fit for many, maybe even most people. It's just the misinformation equating Atkins to a standard ketogenic diet, saying you will stink because someone knew someone on Atkins that stank (lol?), and the like that rubs me the wrong way (an acknowledged pet peeve of mine).
Again, I didn't say anything negative about Atkins or low carb. And keto is part of Atkins (the most well-known part), even if apparently one need not stay in ketosis to do it. I actually hadn't realized that Atkins seems less common among the low carb types these days than formerly in that most everyone I've met doing low carb is doing keto, whereas people used to talk more about Atkins and I'd not made a distinction, as I said. So thanks, I've learned something, even if I still think your response was a little off target given the substance of my post and the question.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »most everyone I've met doing low carb is doing keto, whereas people used to talk more about Atkins and I'd not made a distinction, as I said. So thanks, I've learned something, even if I still think your response was a little off target given the substance of my post and the question.
Just to clarify (not that anyone cares, but it bugs me that I can't edit), this is true if you don't consider paleo a low carb diet, although I think it generally is in practice.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
My impression is that keto and low carb and Atkins get used pretty interchangeably on these boards and I'm not all that concerned with the differences between them and I guess I read the OP as more about low carb (or keto, like I said) in general than Atkins which, yes, is more involved than I realized. Perhaps if one is into low carb diets or the specific virtues of one vs. another the differences would seem more important, but that didn't seem to be the focus of the question.
Oh, they do, but that's due to ignorance about the Atkins diet and misinformation, which is evidenced throughout this thread (more in other posts than yours). Equating Atkins and keto diets is akin to me going around equating a generic bro split with Wendler's 5/3/1 and saying oh they're the same thing. They aren't. One is a pretty strict training routine, while the other is a generic routine that may have some things in common with the first routine, and in other ways may be very different. But they aren't synonymous.
And in my mind, if you actually want to offer the pros and cons of an Atkins diet (like the diet tends to be more satiating, your results can be less reliable as it's dependent on how hungry you feel, it's more regimented with multiple phases and the like and thus requires more effort than basic calorie counting, there can be negative effects on athletic performance particularly at first, etc.) like the OP was asking about, I would think it helps to know more than the common misconception of the diet.
But it doesn't really matter. This isn't the first time people have confused this and it won't be the last. What I find sort of funny is I don't even think Atkins is a great fit for the OP - it's just the ignorant "it makes you smelly!" comments and the like, rather than your comments, that made me want to reply.0 -
AlanaTedmon wrote: »
Do you plan on sticking to a low carb diet for the rest of your life? Don't you think you'll eventually start to miss things like fruit, pizza, beer, ice cream, pie, cake, etc?
I personally think that all "restrictive" diets are a bad idea because people often get sick of them in the long run and then gain back the weight they lost.
And that's why people keep "revisiting" it and going back on Atkins. There were a couple of ladies where I used to work who went back on Atkins 2 or 3 times per year it seemed. After a few months of restricting, feeling great and letting everyone know about it, they went back to putting ice cream in their morning coffee.
0 -
I've never done Atkins, but I've known some people who have. Like any diet, some have kept the weight off, some still do it, and some gained weight back.
To get back to your original question: I think part of the reason for the bad reputation is that after Robert Atkins died, it was noted that he was overweight and had a history of heart problems, which were some of the concerns that other health professionals already had about a high-fat, high-protein diet. Some reported that his heart problems were most likely caused by a virus and not his diet. This paired with the fact that at the time of his death low-carb diet popularity was fizzling out, I think made a lot of people turn against the Atkins diet in particular. People who were already against it had even more reason for their position--that's all.
I think there were also a lot of people doing Atkins back in its hey-day when my parents did it (them included) that didn't really understand the diet or the nutritional theories (for lack of a better word) behing it, and they just sort of thought, "oh, just take the bun off this super greasy restaurant burger and that's Atkins". I remember asking my parents questions about it out of curiosity and they really couldn't tell me much. They didn't know what porportions of fat and protein to eat. There were some fruits and veggies they could eat, but they still refrained from eating them and getting some variety and some sort of balance within whatever nutritional framework they were following. But I don't think that's indictitive of Atkins itself. I think it's just indicitive of anyone looking for a quick fix and doesn't inform themselves about whatever program or non-program they're following.
I think people have to do what works for them. Since you grew up surrounded by it and you seem to like it so far, then it could very likely turn into a long term thing. And if not, at least you tried it and found out for yourself.0 -
I don't think you read the post previous.
You can be in a negative calorie balance and still not burn fat- it depends on your glycogen stores. When you burn through your glycogen stores to a certain degree- about 50-70%- then you start to burn fat.
You HAVE to be in the fat-burning mode to burn fat- pure and simple.
Now, the heart is ALWAYS in the fat-burning mode, but on the aggregate the amount of fat burned is offset by the ingestion of carbohydrates and fats.
That's pseudo-science.
0 -
The trick is to only pseudo-eat breakfast.Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't think you read the post previous.
You can be in a negative calorie balance and still not burn fat- it depends on your glycogen stores. When you burn through your glycogen stores to a certain degree- about 50-70%- then you start to burn fat.
You HAVE to be in the fat-burning mode to burn fat- pure and simple.
Now, the heart is ALWAYS in the fat-burning mode, but on the aggregate the amount of fat burned is offset by the ingestion of carbohydrates and fats.
That's pseudo-science.
0 -
I'd like to point out here that what Atkins does is cut out ALL sugar. There are plenty of medical studies out there (now) to suggest that sugar is what is causing the obesity epidemic in our country, and NOT fat. I am in week five of Atkins - and I'm still doing Phase 1. I haven't lost weight that quickly, but I do a lot of my own cooking, have been experimenting with a lot of recipes, and think I could do this for a long time.
Also it's important to note that Atkins doesn't support the idea that you can live on steak and bacon and mayo. These things are portion controlled within the diet - so you get 2 tablespoons of mayo as a serving, or two TABLESPOONS of heavy cream as you have to still be conscious of your calories.
Since giving up sugar I haven't felt this good in MONTHS. My asthma and my allergies have been 100% better, and I pay more attention to the food that goes into my body. I eat plenty of vegetables, and I spend money that I used to spend on junk on good quality meat - which tastes way better anyway. I believe everyone is different and what works for one person doesn't work for someone else - this works for me. If it works for you - then who cares.
Also I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that JAMA did a study on this that was published a few weeks ago - and while Atkins was the most successful at weight loss in the early stages (6 mos) it was nearly identical to low fat diets in the long run (1 year +). What's important is that doing anything is better than nothing.
0 -
Do you mean you can't edit your post? If that's what you mean then just click on the post and a little settings wheel will appear, click it, click edit.lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »most everyone I've met doing low carb is doing keto, whereas people used to talk more about Atkins and I'd not made a distinction, as I said. So thanks, I've learned something, even if I still think your response was a little off target given the substance of my post and the question.
Just to clarify (not that anyone cares, but it bugs me that I can't edit), this is true if you don't consider paleo a low carb diet, although I think it generally is in practice.
That's exactly what I meant.
Thanks so much!
0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't think you read the post previous.
You can be in a negative calorie balance and still not burn fat- it depends on your glycogen stores. When you burn through your glycogen stores to a certain degree- about 50-70%- then you start to burn fat.
You HAVE to be in the fat-burning mode to burn fat- pure and simple.
Now, the heart is ALWAYS in the fat-burning mode, but on the aggregate the amount of fat burned is offset by the ingestion of carbohydrates and fats.
That's pseudo-science.
Steve, who seems to think he's actually Sebastian Johnston, a professor of respiratory medicine, likes to spew out random crap that he believes are facts.
http://www.imperial.ac.uk/AP/faces/pages/read/Home.jsp?person=s.johnston&_adf.ctrl-state=39wt4x7mc_3
-1 -
No, the obesity epidemic is caused by too many calories and not enough activity. You can become obese on any diet if you eat too many calories.jmarton1977 wrote: »I'd like to point out here that what Atkins does is cut out ALL sugar. There are plenty of medical studies out there (now) to suggest that sugar is what is causing the obesity epidemic in our country, and NOT fat. I am in week five of Atkins - and I'm still doing Phase 1. I haven't lost weight that quickly, but I do a lot of my own cooking, have been experimenting with a lot of recipes, and think I could do this for a long time.
Also it's important to note that Atkins doesn't support the idea that you can live on steak and bacon and mayo. These things are portion controlled within the diet - so you get 2 tablespoons of mayo as a serving, or two TABLESPOONS of heavy cream as you have to still be conscious of your calories.
Since giving up sugar I haven't felt this good in MONTHS. My asthma and my allergies have been 100% better, and I pay more attention to the food that goes into my body. I eat plenty of vegetables, and I spend money that I used to spend on junk on good quality meat - which tastes way better anyway. I believe everyone is different and what works for one person doesn't work for someone else - this works for me. If it works for you - then who cares.
Also I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that JAMA did a study on this that was published a few weeks ago - and while Atkins was the most successful at weight loss in the early stages (6 mos) it was nearly identical to low fat diets in the long run (1 year +). What's important is that doing anything is better than nothing.
0 -
jmarton1977 wrote: »Also it's important to note that Atkins doesn't support the idea that you can live on steak and bacon and mayo. These things are portion controlled within the diet - so you get 2 tablespoons of mayo as a serving, or two TABLESPOONS of heavy cream as you have to still be conscious of your calories.
It's this kind of thing that actually turns me off of the diet even more than the idea that I'd have to cut carbs heavily (although that too, as I like the level of carbs I'm at). I really don't understand why you'd want such a prescriptive diet. I also am always puzzled when people talk about how they are eating veggies or whatever on it, as if they couldn't be if not doing a prescriptive diet. I eat lots of veggies, and I just count calories and focus on the macro levels that works for me (which has changed over time due to changes in my activity level and so on).
I'm not being critical--and I agree with you that the rap on Atkins for being for people who eat nothing but bacon and cheese 24/7 is unfair (although part of this is that the diet itself changed from the early days, I believe, and some supporters still like to talk up this aspect that you say is no more)--but it's something that I never do understand, just as I don't get why people like diets that give you a specific daily meal plan.
But I certainly can see that cutting carbs would be for some people a relatively easy way to cut calories and feel fuller.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions